A Rule-Based System for Assessing Consistency Between UML Models

  • Carlos Mario Zapata
  • Guillermo González
  • Alexander Gelbukh
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4827)

Abstract

The main goal of requirements specification is the transformation of a “rough draft” of stakeholder needs and expectations into a semi-formal specification, represented by several diagrams, commonly UML diagrams. These diagrams must be consistent with each other, but consistency among different UML diagrams is not defined by the UML specification, and the research about inter-model consistency is still immature. We propose, in this paper, a rule-based system to detect consistency problems among UML diagrams. In order to complete this task, we have defined a set of rules in OCL, and then we use a novel approach for implementing the system by means of Xquery and Xpath languages. The use of these languages helps the rule-based system to interact with traditional CASE tools.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Jackson, M.: Software Requirements & Specifications: a lexicon of practice, principles and prejudices. Addison Wesley, Great Britain (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zowghi, D., Gervasi, V.: The Three Cs of requirements: consistency, completeness, and correctness. In: International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundations for Software Quality, Essen, pp. 155–164. Essener Informatik Beitiage, Germany (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    OMG – Object Management Group. http://www.omg.org
  4. 4.
    Chiorean, D., Pasca, M., Carcu, A., Botiza, C., Moldovan, S.: Ensuring UML models consistency using the OCL Environment. In: Sixth International Conference on the Unified Modelling Language - the Language and its applications, San Francisco (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Glinz, M.: A lightweight approach to consistency of Scenarios and Class Models. In: En: Fourth International Conference on Requirements Engineering, Illinois, USA, June 10-23 (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gryce, C., Finkelstein, A., Nentwich, C.: Lightweight Checking for UML Based Software Development. In: Workshop on Consistency Problems in UML-based Software Development. Dresden, Germany (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kösters, G., Pagel, B.-U., Winter, M.: Coupling Use Cases and Class Models. In: BCS FACS/EROS Workshop on Making Object-oriented Methods more Rigorous, London (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu, D., Subramaniam, K., Far, B.H., Eberlein, A.: Automating transition from use-cases to class model. In: IEEE CCECE 2003. Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, vol. 2, pp. 831–834 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shishkov, B., Xie, Z., Lui, K., Dietz, J.: Using norm analysis to derive use case from business processes. In: 5th Workshop on Organizations semiotics, Delft the Netherlands, June 14-15, 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buhr, R.J.A.: Use Case Maps as Architectural Entities for Complex Systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 24(12), 1131–1155 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sunetnanta, T., Finkelstein, A.y.: Automated Consistency Checking for Multiperspective Software Specifications. In: Proceedings of the 26th Australasian computer science conference, vol. 16, pp. 291–300 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ligêza, A.: Logical Foundations of Rule-Based Systems. Studies in Computational Intelligence (SCI) 11, 191–198 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    W3C – World Wide Web Consortium. http://www.w3.org
  14. 14.
    XML – Extensible Markup Language. http://www.w3.org/XML
  15. 15.
    Travers, N., Dang, T.: An Extensible Rule Transformation Model for XQuery Optimization. In: ICEIS. International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, INSTICC, Madeira (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pal, S., Istvan, C., Seeliger, O., Rys, M., Schaller, G., Yu, W., Tomic, D., Baras, A., Berg, B., Churin, D., Kogan, E.: XQuery implementation in a relational database system. In: Proceedings of the 31st international conference on Very large data bases, pp. 1175–1186. Trondheim, Norway (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Che, D., Aberer, K., Özsu, M.: Query optimization in XML structured-document databases. The VLDB Journal 15(3), 263–289 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Almendros, J., Becerra, A., Enciso, F.: Magic Sets for the XPath Language. Journal of Universal Computer Science 12(11), 1651–1678 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eguchi, G., Leff, L.: Rule-based XML: Rules about XML in XML To Support Litigation Regarding Contracts. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10, 283–294 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schaffert, S., Xcerpt, A.: Rule-Based Query and Transformation Language for the Web. PhD thesis, University of Munich (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos Mario Zapata
    • 1
  • Guillermo González
    • 1
  • Alexander Gelbukh
    • 2
  1. 1.Escuela de Sistemas, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Carrera 80 N° 65-23, Bloque M8. MedellínColombia
  2. 2.Computing Research Center (CIC), National Polytechnic Institute (IPN), Col. Zacatenco, 07738, DFMexico

Personalised recommendations